Talk:Schwarzschild criterion

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: moved per request. Favonian (talk) 17:46, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Schwarzschild Criterion → Schwarzschild criterion –

Wikipedia typically downcases laws, principles, hypotheses, etc. Per WP:MOSCAPS ("Wikipedia avoids unnecessary capitalization") and WP:TITLE, this is a generic, common term, not a propriety or commercial term, so the article title should be downcased. Lowercase will match the formatting of related article titles. Tony  (talk)  12:35, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree.TR 10:48, 19 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Support per nom's rationale. Dicklyon (talk) 06:22, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Not clear
Imho, this article is not clear: while I suppose that by Z they mean the radial component, what g do you mean? Like, 9.8 m/s^2 and would that apply to ALL stars? I know another expression for this criterion that does not involve g and Cp, present on Astrophysics for Physicists: would that apply better? Since I am a physicist, but not an astrophysicists, I would not dare to modify the article without previous discussion. Andrejevic (talk) 17:02, 27 November 2016 (UTC)Andrejevic

Wrong Schwarzschild
I think there Karl Schwarzschild is mistaken for his son, Martin Schwarzschild who was also an astrophysicist but did study convection and is the one actually cited every time Schwarzschild criterion is cited in papers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Narsonalin (talk • contribs) 14:54, 30 March 2020 (UTC)